T

he bombings of three churches and a police station in Surabaya last week were shocking. The profiles of the suicide bombers — parents who dragged their children into their horrific crime — have left us all extremely devastated. What can we do to stop divisive and violent interpretations of religious teachings from creeping into families?

Prior to and after the bombings, several intellectuals suggested some solutions for countering divisive and violent interpretations of Islam.

First, Farid Muttaqin’s April 20 article in this newspaper calls for the strengthening of fundamental values of inclusion and equality in the narratives of Indonesian women’s movements, which are increasingly being transformed by politically charged Muslim groups.

Then, Lailatul Fitriyah’s article on May 15 calls on the Indonesian Muslim community to acknowledge the ways in which many Muslims practice Islam that tend to perpetuate religious and ethnic discrimination.

Lastly, Fitriani and Alif Satria’s May 17 article suggests that disengaging women from terrorist groups requires creating certain conditions that better appreciate their domestic role and provide them with more opportunities to find meaning in their lives.

Essentially, these scholars are troubled by the current trend of particular Islamists’ actions that obscures Islam’s core message of humanity and ignites conflict instead. To extend their lines of concern, I propose three strategies to contain extreme religious interpretations from influencing Indonesian families any further.

First at the individual level, we can no longer assume women and children are innocent and incapable of inflicting violence on other humans. Since the Surabaya bombings, the “equality” paradigm may work better: if men can, so can women. As Fitriani and Satria explained, individuals overwhelmed by their insecurities are terrorists’ easy prey.

Thus, we ought to discipline our thoughts and speech by no longer reproducing traditional stereotypes of men and women among family members, friends, colleagues or subordinates. Because by doing so, we only perpetuate the insecurities that both men and women face in today’s competitive market society.

Second, at the organizational level, Indonesia’s women’s movement groups must increase collaboration among themselves. Over the years we have seen a proliferation of women’s movement groups such as the 45 organizations included in the Network of Pro-Women National Legislation Program (JKP3) and the party-affiliated ones such as Barisan Puteri Keadilan (Ranks of Women of Justice) of the Prosperous Justice Party (PKS) and Wanita Demokrat (Democrat Women) of the Democratic Party (PD).

Given the increasingly visible extremists claiming to defend Islam, all women’s movement groups must leave their differences on feminism behind, and work together instead under their common primary goal: improving the quality of all women’s lives in Indonesia.

More importantly, as Farid has cautioned us, women’s movement groups must be extra cautious in using certain terms that could potentially generate greater opposition to their cause.

Making some compromises acceptable to both progressive and conservative groups where necessary, rather than championing “feminist” or “liberal” causes, therefore, is key to advancing the agenda for expanding the rights and well-being of all women including ethnic and religious minorities.

Third, at the national level, government bodies such as the Women’s Empowerment and Child Protection Ministry and the Religious Affairs Ministry must cooperate better with women’s movement groups. Only through such cooperation can effective ways to implement one of Lailatul’s suggestions be devised — that is, demanding that local religious authorities promote teachings that improve interreligious and interethnic relations.

However, effective mechanisms for monitoring religious teachings or sermons are necessary in this regard. Such a difficult task can only be approached through a strong and mutual partnership between the government and women’s movement groups.

Ending the spread of divisive and violent interpretations of religious teachings from creeping into families may not be the exclusive job of women’s movement groups.

However, our government and society should support and tap the useful resources of Indonesia’s women’s movement groups to pioneer societal change. Note the recent article by Julia Suryakusuma, which reminded us of the key roles of the Voice of Concerned Mothers (SIP) and the Women’s Coalition for Press Freedom (KPKP) in initiating demonstrations against the New Order regime’s authoritarian rule.
___________________________